Yep dune was written in 1965


https://www.inafarawaygalaxy.com/2017/09/the-influence-of-herberts-dune-on-star.html

Oh I know. It's more for the people who are like "what's going on?!? Ahh too confusing"

schmendeler said:

---

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Dune is a great story but has many of the age old themes so don't let the story overwhelm you.

Prodigal son rises from betrayed "good" family to lead a massive revolution with religious ties

Dune is like dances with wolves/Avatar mixed

Mighty empire seeks to farm/harvest ultra valuable resource that is somewhat unlimited yet only exists in an incredibly rugged and remote geography.

Native peoples live in that region and thrive off the resource and worship it as it has a religious value. They resist the white man.

Prodigal son "flips sides" and leads natives to "take it back". Kevin Costner = Paul Muaddib. Or… Luke Skywalker

---

Except those things came after Dune.

---

Yep. Its closer to Lawrence of Arabia.

Cromagnum said:

---

Finally catching a showing at a Cinemark XD this evening (no IMAX close by). Will catch a 2nd showing with the wife later because she knows zero about the story and don't need 100 questions interrupting my initial viewing.

---

Yep. Very smart on my part. Wife would have ruined initial watch with me asking all kinds of things. This thing was visually beautiful and the sound was awesome. Same complaint as some folks that some of the dialogue gets lost.

AgStuckinLBK said:

---

About to start

---

Well? Your thoughts?

AgStuckinLBK said:

---

Ready for part two!

---

& 3 & 4

As the person who started this thread, it looks as if I'm the last one to actually see it. We are seeing it tomorrow afternoon, finally.

I can't f'ing wait.

its so freaking good man.

YouBet said:

---

As the person who started this thread, it looks as if I'm the last one to actually see it. We are seeing it tomorrow afternoon, finally.

I can't f'ing wait.

---

Not the last... I won't be seeing it until later this week

YouBet said:

---

THAT WAS F'ING AWESOME.

---

YES!!!

DTP02 said:

---

Saw it today. Great bit of movie-making. World-building was exceptional. The only shortcoming was that I was left wanting more. And I don't mean that I wanted the plot to advance more chronologically, I mean I wanted more time spent getting to that point, more time with the characters and the world before the overthrow. Feeling that way about a movie that long is a testament in itself.

And I have to point out the very obvious inspiration ( to the point of being derivative, even) that this material was for arguably the greatest movie franchise of our time, the franchise that had widespread cultural impact which continues to this day. The movie franchise which truly solidified and launched the career of one of cinema's greatest stars, although the "main" star of the original didn't ascend nearly as high after.

I'm speaking, of course, of Tremors.

---

I mean Reba rose pretty high, but who else

I liked this film but surprisingly I miss the voice over narration from the David Lynch version as well as the 1984 soundtrack.

Casting and performances were great with the exception of Duncan Idaho. Mamoa doesn't deliver lines well if they consist of more than monosyllabic grunts. The scenes with him in it just seemed out of place with the rest of the cast.

I think his ability to pull off the fighting scenes so well more than balances any weaknesses in his acting.
I dont think he was bad either, but it wasn't really how I pictured the character behaving/talking.

Thinking about Mamoa, I started putting together a list of all the changes from the book in a pros/cons list:

Pros:
- Change Liet Kynes from father to mother of Chani. I think this will be more relatable to a modern movie audience and will probably be used to make Chani more blood thirsty in part 2.
- Removal of adult content. The movie is much better off omitting the more depraved aspects of the Harkonen appetites.
- No development of Emperor, Spacing Guild, Smugglers. This is for the best as the additional details would only confuse the story.
- Characters. Mamoa was very different from what I expected, but I loved his role. Paul's character in the book is often devoid of outward emotion - giving him an older brother figure to care for and lose lets him show his depth of feeling which would be largely lost in a screen translation. All the other characters were superb in their roles, especially Lady Jessica. Her finger movements and facial expressions convey her feelings in a direct way to the movie audience. I do wish the Baron was better developed - but that was 15 minutes extra I may be willing to watch that few others would.
Cons:
- No feyd rautha (yet). I wish they had included him in part 1, but it would've added another 10 min to the run time for introductions. I honestly believe his character will not be included in part 2 either.
- No significant speaking role for Piter. He's such a non entity in the movie. Again, it would take too much time to develop him properly.
- No banquet scene in Arakeen. It would've been better if they spent more time to develop the tension on Arakeen. In the book, there's so much space for tension building before the hammer falls. The banquet scene ties into the harvester scene as we learn of Harkonen treachery.

Feyd doesnt appear in the book until after where the movie ended, so I was good with that decision. Would feel differently if they had just skipped it like the dinner at Arrakeen.

I think cutting the dinner was a major lost opportunity but maybe that's just us purists being picky. And I wish there was more background on mentats given.

These kinds of discussions by the screenwriters must be interesting. You want to world-build, but you don't want the movie to be just world-building and dialogue. I'd have liked a little more on the mentats and the lack of AI, etc, but I also understand why it wasn't put in.

Sapper Redux said:

---

These kinds of discussions by the screenwriters must be interesting. You want to world-build, but you don't want the movie to be just world-building and dialogue. I'd have liked a little more on the mentats and the lack of AI, etc, but I also understand why it wasn't put in.

---

Agreed.

YouBet said:

---

Feyd doesnt appear in the book until after where the movie ended, so I was good with that decision. Would feel differently if they had just skipped it like the dinner at Arrakeen.

I think cutting the dinner was a major lost opportunity but maybe that's just us purists being picky. And I wish there was more background on mentats given.

---

Feyd is included in the book at the first introduction of the Harkonens. The Baron and Piter are discussing plans for Dune and the Baron keeps mentioning to Feyd to pay attention to his conversation with Piter.

tamuangry said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Feyd doesnt appear in the book until after where the movie ended, so I was good with that decision. Would feel differently if they had just skipped it like the dinner at Arrakeen.

I think cutting the dinner was a major lost opportunity but maybe that's just us purists being picky. And I wish there was more background on mentats given.

---

Feyd is included in the book at the first introduction of the Harkonens. The Baron and Piter are discussing plans for Dune and the Baron keeps mentioning to Feyd to pay attention to his conversation with Piter.

---

Hmm, yep that's right. It's so brief I guess I forgot about it.

Excited to finally be seeing the movie tonight!

Regarding the Harkonen appetite for depravity, it's been many years since I read the book or saw the Lynch movie. That scene in the film with the Baron pulling the "heart plug" on the teenaged boy, I do not remember that from the book. Was it in the book? That was quite disturbing.

Google is my friend...I recall correctly. Talk about injecting 'Blue Velvet' moment into the movie. David Lynch was pretty twisted.